Spain v. Rushen’s Empirical Analysis
883 F.2d 712 · 1989
Citation profile
71 federal appellate · 1 district · 12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 113 later decisions — most recently September 2024 · most notably United States v. Baker (1993), Taylor v. Maddox (2004)
71 federal appellate · 1 district · 12 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Anderson v. City of Bessemer City · United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · Younger v. Harris · Brady v. United States · Carnegie v. United States
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 113 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“must be persuaded by compelling circumstances 'that some measure [is] needed to maintain the security of the courtroom.' Second, the court must 'pursue less restrictive alternatives before imposing physical restraints.'”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“may confuse and embarrass the [individual], thereby impairing his mental faculties[,] and they may cause him pain.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“(1) Physical restraints may cause jury prejudice, reversing the presumption of innocence; (2) Shackles may impair the defendant's mental faculties; (3) Physical restraints may impede the communication between the defendant and his [or her] lawyer; (4) Shackles may detract from the dignity and decorum of the judicial proceedings; and (5) Physical restraints may be painful to the defendant.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.